Quantitative Impact of Coil Misalignment and Misplacement in Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
Koehler, M.; Kammer, T.; Goetz, S. M.
Show abstract
IntroductionTargeting in transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) involves the accurate placement and positioning of the stimulation coil on the head of a subject or patient. In clinical and research applications, this placement is even done manually and/or with fixed coil holders that do not compensate for motion and drift of the head. The placement involves six degrees of freedom (DOF; three position DOF: 1x contact and 2x head location; three rotational DOF: 2x alignment and 1x electric field direction/orientation), which challenge operators. This procedure is--even with an experienced user--prone to positioning errors, which can result in low treatment efficacy or high stimulation strength due to overestimating the resting motor threshold (RMT). Whereas the position and field orientation are at least widely appreciated, the coil-head alignment and its impact are often not even known. Errors involve constant errors, drift (both leading to bias and inter-individual variability), and particularly fluctuations (causing intra-individual variability). ObjectiveWe demonstrate the impact of positioning error on cortical field strength to get a better understanding of the importance of accurate positioning and compare as well as quantify the impact of position vs. alignment errors. MethodsWe simulated the impact in a realistic head anatomy to quantify various levels of position errors and misalignment, rolling-off the coil from the target. ResultsPosition and alignment errors shift the focus of the electric field and reduce the electric field in the actual target. A misalignment of 10{degrees} can exceed the loss of stimulation strength in the target associated with a shift of 10 mm, corresponding to threshold stimulation leading to no detectable electromyographic response anymore. Misalignment in the direction of the handle (pitch), with which many operators appear to struggle most, reduces the field in the actual target faster than left-right roll. ConclusionThis work highlights the importance of the coil-head alignment for intra- and interindividual variability.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Non-invasive stimulation with Temporal Interference: Optimization of the electric field deep in the brain with the use of a genetic algorithm 96%
- Optimizing the Electric Field Strength in Multiple Targets for Multichannel Transcranial Electric Stimulation 95%
- Input-Output Slope Curve Estimation in Neural Stimulation Based on Optimal Sampling Principles 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Impact of galvanic vestibular stimulation electrode current density on brain current flow patterns: Does electrode size matter? 96%
- Detailed measurements and simulations of electric field distribution of two TMS coils cleared for obsessive compulsive disorder in the brain and in specific regions associated with OCD 94%
- Computational modelling of the long-term effects of brain stimulation on the local and global structural connectivity of epileptic patients 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- A surface metric and software toolbox for EEG electrode grids in the macaque 94%
- CluSem: Accurate Clustering-based Ensemble Methodto Predict Motor Imagery Tasks from Multi-channelEEG Data 94%
- Time series analysis of trial-to-trial variability of MEG power spectrum during rest state, unattented listening and frequency-modulated tones classification 94%
Similar papers in this journal
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.